Note: Citations are based on reference standards. However, formatting rules can vary widely between applications and fields of interest or study. The specific requirements or preferences of your reviewing publisher, classroom teacher, institution or organization should be applied.

"In Snake Oil Science, R. Barker Bausell provides an engaging look at the scientific evidence for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and at the logical, psychological, and physiological pitfalls that lead otherwise intelligent people - including researchers, physicians, and therapists - to endorse these cures, The book's ultimate goal is to reveal not whether these therapies work - as Bausell explains, most do work, although weakly and temporarily - but whether they work for the reasons their proponents believe."--Jacket.Read more...

Add library to Favorites

Please choose whether or not you want other users to be able to see on your profile that this library is a favorite of yours.

Allow this favorite library to be seen by othersKeep this favorite library private

The rise of complementary and alternative therapies --
A brief history of placebos --
Natural impediments to making valid inferences --
Impediments that prevent physicians and therapists from making valid inferences --
Impediments that prevent poorly trained scientists from making valid inferences --
Why randomized placebo control groups are necessary in CAM research --
Judging the credibility and plausibility of scientific evidence --
Some personal research involving acupuncture --
How we know that the placebo effect exists --
A biochemical explanation for the placebo effect --
What high-quality trials reveal about CAM --
What high-quality systematic reviews reveal about CAM --
How CAM therapies are hypothesized to work --
Tying up a few loose ends.

Responsibility:

R. Barker Bausell.

More information:

Local System Bib Number:

334142

Abstract:

Bausell provides an engaging look at the scientific evidence for complementary and alternative medicine and at the logical, psychological, and physiological pitfalls that lead otherwise intelligent people--including researchers, physicians, and therapists--to endorse these remedies.Read more...

Retrieving notes about this item

Reviews

Editorial reviews

Publisher Synopsis

"Mr. Bausell has emerged with a book about his true intellectual passion-- how we teach, how kids learn, and what would give us better results... His vision of the learning lab -- with students touching computer screens as they follow computerized lessons, each of them learning at his or her own pace, and with tutors providing individualized instruction as necessary-- suggests a more efficient model for learning, particularly for children already behind the curve, and real urgency about the future." --Dan Rodricks, The Baltimore SunRead more...

Good start... not quite there.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. After reading such a dense book on improbability, this one seemed like it was very fluffy. Anyway, this book tends to refute alternative medicine is merely a placebo effect or more of a fluke of luck rather than real medical science or having any...Read more...

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. After reading such a dense book on improbability, this one seemed like it was very fluffy. Anyway, this book tends to refute alternative medicine is merely a placebo effect or more of a fluke of luck rather than real medical science or having any real effect on the patient's quality of life. He examines and has also conducted studies to test acupuncture and its possible effects along with touching other alternative medicines.

I don't know. Although a lot of his assertions feel like a he said, she said scenario, the only part that was concrete was the chapter where he actually did the study on acupuncture. The other chapters did refute the possible bias that affects how a study is engineered and how it is slanted to give the desired outcome though the author is very gentle in his handling of this topic. I guess I would really rate this book a two out of five. I don't disagree with his points but find they are weakly supported and read more like a psychology self-help book rather than an investigative science book.